FelixCA

29 minutes ago, Anna said:

Well here we are discussing the man and his motive. We cannot see into his heart. But the principle stays the same. Whether given in a 'good cause' or 'bad cause'. Whether he was genuinely concerned about the lives of others or not,  those lives were still affected.  There were many others whose lives were affected positively. Talking to brothers and sisters we see that most are grateful for having learned the Truth. It improved their life on many levels and gave their life meaning. Those are the positive things we want to focus on. But it doesn't negate those whose life was affected negatively, and the sad part is, quite unnecessarily at times. We don't want to have the attitude of some kind of collateral damage, that it's OK.

While we don’t know anyone’s heart aside from God himself, Raymond’s actions spoke volumes. It did have a negative impact on Bethel. Only those that revered Raymond thought it was an injustice. Those that learned in a positive way strengthened their faith to understand God was not willing to allow a self-severing person to push the Watchtower backward rather than advance spiritually. What would be his motive now?

I believe JWinsider mentioned there were some at Bethel that saw him as the next “President” of the Watchtower. The unanimous decision to have a governing body was not to overburden only a single individual and it was paramount to develop a body rather than a board. However, Raymond liked the idea of the originator of the Bible Students, Russell. But, if you understand Russell’s ACTIONS, he preferred not to be looked like a leader, rather than a follower of Christ alongside everyone else.

Therefore, Raymond’s Actions were to regress the Watchtower and it had a negative impact. The only good takeaway that can be seen now for true Christians, learn from Raymond’s mistakes. A person that had a positive high responsibility and through it all away for loyalty to a man, and personal desires. All of which goes against, Bible principle.

34 minutes ago, Anna said:

Not sure what you mean. Do you mean those in leadership positions claiming something as a fact? And that we should accept this because they are guided by God's holy spirit?

Understandable. It does get confusing when we try to put our thoughts into print. It gets misunderstood more often than any of us want to admit. Even professional authors are scrutinized for their works. Can the GB claim something factual, YES!, they rely on scripture to make it a fact from a man's point of view. Did Raymond subvert and distort Bible facts to promote his own agenda, YES! therefore, the motive of Raymond would go against God's Holy Spirit, and that's a fact.

25 minutes ago, Anna said:

I think his point was, (if he was being genuine) that it wasn't about the failing necessarily, but about how it affected the lives of others (in a bad way) who were completely reliant, and were told to be reliant, on that information, and on those giving that information.

This would be a good view if it was given as a good cause. Unfortunately, Raymond actions became centered in not being genuine but self-serving.

People at Bethel can say whatever they wish as an opinion, but Raymond’s actions spoke for themselves. Sincerity was not an option for him. Blind rage was.

That type of action affected others to promote apostate understandings, not biblical ones. Those that accepted his kind of methodology did so with a willful mind to accept what men claimed as fact, rather than be reliant on the fact that we are guided by God’s Holy Spirit. That makes a world of difference in Bible understanding.

2 hours ago, Equivocation said:

I remember the last time I confronted an apostate (who said he was a a Christian) and spoke of God, he said he'd kill me even though he was twice my age, even dared me to go to his town and that I'd be praying to wishing God was here in person when he is done with me. It didn't faze me that much because I was right about what I said because he was saying untrue things about God and about Moses and the Israelites. He was angry because he was corrected on the Old Testament. Even before that some of these apostates attacked the hall I was at, and caused someone who is connected to a sister to go to war against the apostates.

I’m sorry to read about this personal experience. A dangerous one indeed. That just shows not all witnesses live a sheltered life like outsiders think they do. Confused witnesses are free to leave the organization whenever they want, and not be stocked like they do with Scientology. Just like it is anyone’s free will, NOT to associate with anybody that doesn’t share the SAME values of being Christ true followers with Christian ethics and faith. Example, If my brother became a drug addict, why would I want to associate with him? I would want him to repent and clean himself up. Raymond thought shunning a derogatory remark was unloving. How could he account for millions of outsiders that do the same?

Raymond Franz lost the mission as a disciple in favor of friendship and wanting personal power. A few examples on how perception, of some, can become clouded by following the same pattern of insincere ideals. They call it, “in search for the truth by understanding facts.” The problem there, the more facts are gathered the more confused the original research becomes. I wonder, what will Raymond say when he is judged by Christ. Not about himself, but when asked, did your book prevent anyone from knowing the gospel of Christ? Or interfered enough to prevent a soul from knowing the one true God according to my instructions left in the inspired books that became known as the Holy Bible. 2 Peter 2:20-22

Unfortunately, this is what happens when people confuse the administrative roles of the GB with doctoral understanding.

Stay safe my brother. Always remember with situations such as these, which I know only too well, Matthew 10:28.

35 minutes ago, Anna said:

I don't think that this late in the stream of time it is difficult at all for anyone to see that the organization has had wrong expectations and understanding. Time itself has has proved this. No one has to try very hard at all.

The argument offered would lead us to what? In ancient times, I can offer many examples where the faithful people of God failed. What is the point, if we don’t allow God to make the necessary corrections rather than rely upon our own heart to make them?

It seems there is an understanding of not willing to allow God, lead his people to the promise land and wish to intervene whenever convenient. Exodus 14:11, Deuteronomy 8:2

Door to Door

“If the question were put to the headquarters organization of the Watch Tower Society whether each member (if physically able) must do house-to-house witnessing to be a true Witness, in fact to be a true Christian, the answer would probably be that this is not an absolute requirement. (Actually, it would be extremely difficult to get a clear, straightforward answer on such a question; the headquarters organization is remarkably reticent about expressing itself in writing on sensitive issues and, even when given, answers are often couched in ambiguous terms, or evasive and roundabout reasoning.) We have already seen, however, that responsible men in the organization acknowledge that there is serious reason to question whether in reality the Witness community as a whole engages in this activity simply out of a heartfelt desire to do it, as something freely motivated, done without any sense of compulsion.”

To read an error of attempting to argue against the door to door witnessing when scripture clearly states how Jesus would send the apostles are one of a thousand (exaggeration) ways; maybe not Raymond misinterpreted scripture to win the minds and hearts of troubled people. Therefore, his research was NOT incumbent on Bible truth. James 5:16-20

If we use that standard, it would be, we couldn’t trust our own heart. It would amount to the same thing if we use men literally rather than men lead by the Holy Spirit. Matthew 15:19

The figure of speech would suggest people weren’t trusting the apostles as ordinary men but rather as messengers of God. How else can we see the power of the Holy Spirit? Raymond fell for the deception.

The Vatican fought holy wars. Their preachers still go into combat as a show of faith that God is on their side. Can we trust people that should understand not to shed blood? 1 Chronicles 28:3, Hebrews 12:4

These people profess to have the Holy Spirit guided by God. What say you about ACTIONS?

2 minutes ago, Anna said:

It is evident in Raymond's case, that he only wrote what the Societies' understanding of those dates were at the time. He added nothing of his own understanding or interpretation to these dates. He quotes nobody else but the Societies' literature concerning these dates. It had nothing to do with anyone else's perception but only of the perception of those who mentioned these dates in the first place ( Barbour, Russell, Rutherford, Franz...)

These dates are only a common theme for ex-JW books because most of them derived this information from Raymond's books

I will disagree with this assessment. misinterpreting articles and Watchtower lead information does not the truth make

48 minutes ago, Anna said:

What do you mean by meaningless understandings? And what do you mean by "what the world doesn't already know? Please explain a little. Perhaps give examples of the 'meaningless understandings' you have in mind. And what is the 'knowledge' you are talking about that the world ready knows?

What is the Ex-JW and opposers perception about 607BC, 537BC 1874, 1878, 1914, 1917, 1919, 1925, 1969, 1975 etc.? This is a common theme for ex-JW's books. Nothing original.

If people never understood the significance of these dates, yet are willing to break ranks because of a misguided understanding, what would be the message for loyal witnesses, and what would it be called aside from meaningless.

What does the power of Satan have to do about seeking truth? It becomes a personal opinion about something they believed was understood like Raymond, and then the facts weren’t. Don’t you think Raymond put too much faith on research gathered, rather trust in God the vast research done by the organization reached a different conclusion? How can anyone prove it one way or another? Yet, Raymond and people like Raymond came to an absolute decision, they are correct. By who's standards are they correct?

So, excuse me, I rather trust in God and Bible understanding rather than men trying very hard to prove the organization wrong.

When the same distorted information is circulated, what is the benefit? When the same topics are offered in a closed setting just because some don’t appreciate a response that refutes such claims, what is the difference with what the GB is being accused of?

At some point, this rhetoric needs to make sense? Not just become a selling point for the other side.

4 hours ago, Anna said:

Have you read the book?

Both! I have read other apostate books as well. I only see meaningless understandings just like any other ex-JW book out there. There's nothing original that the world doesn't already know. Canon fodder for people like butler. 😁

Well, then it appears that you hold the same misguided understanding on what the definition of apostate means.

Studying the same material with a blind eye doesn’t constitute good results. That just means there are witnesses willing and able to accept obscured thoughts by questionable people that were not qualified to make certain determinations with their own personal opinion.

The devil here indeed works in mysteries ways. It’s good you follow the same thought as True Tom.

To make false claims is to make an argument meaningless. especially when it comes to 1914, etc. Therefore, thanks for crediting misguided people for an opinionated argument. Have you ever thought of writing your own book about accepting apostasy?

There might have been one group that was missed. The presumption of an active member that acquiesce to the tune of false and misleading information. It’s always the quiet ones that are overlooked, even though they are the most dangerous when it comes to wisdom. James 1:26

I have looked for this Allen Smith that is being mentioned here. Once by Witness and once by JWinsider. Is this a punchline or an inside joke?

I guess when we go into Walmart, The manager gives us an account on their daily operation, and they mention what the corporate members are saying. This is indeed a new light, can we say it is with wisdom?

It is true that some Bethel members defy scripture with gossip, does this bring new light or just another way of saying it’s a personal opinion on how I see things. Exodus 23:1,  2 Corinthians 12:20

I think the irony here would be that some say it is important to understand Raymond’s thoughts about the goings-on inside Bethel, yet some here find it necessary to develop a JW only section to keep personal thoughts secret. This is indeed amazing how people think without discernment enough to say, what would be the difference? Ephesians 4:29

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Again, you make no sense. If this is another reference to Carl Olaf Jonsson per the argument that Allen Smith invariably brought up in this context, it is still a false argument. R.Franz discovered the problems with our chronology way back before 1969, while writing the Chronology entry in the Aid Book that came out in 1969. Jonsson had not even started his questioning of the chronology back then, had he? Brothers that I knew in Writing would not touch the Jonsson manuscript precisely because they already questioned the chronology and realized that they might get an assignment to rebut COJ if they took an interest. This is why it sat on a shelf, and was called the "hot potato" for at least a year, and no one dared touch it.

Oh! I think we can give Raymond credit for mentioning Carl in his book as though new light was thrust upon his eyes. Evil has the tendency to blind people to the truth. So, it’s not just a matter of mimicking what others had said before about 1914, 1925, 1975 etc. it’s laughable on how one belief was strong but when explained in such a disingenuous way, it became wrong.

That kind of nonsense belongs in an Ex-JW pile. But it’s true those books are for people with a weak heart and wish to follow in Raymond’s footsteps to become as confused as he ended up being.

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

It is understandable for me to see your disappoint about R.F. or similar characters inside JW. Yes, perhaps your view about him is correct. But for many of us is of less concern why he wrote a book about GB and WT. We can feel sorrow for him or we can say he is/was hypocrite. Nevertheless, information's we get from his inside insight about WT GB mechanism are more important then he alone. Because "The Truth" is in question, not he, not me, not you. 

what would be the difference from any other ExJW that writes a book with the same old storylines? I don't see how his book is more special than any other.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

That's true. I have no proof that Fred Franz didn't. But if Fred Franz really had challenged the book in any way, that surely would have been huge news. Some Witness somewhere would surely have made a note of it. Interesting, however, that some Witnesses have said that they first heard about certain controversial issues (re: WTS history) in this book by R.Franz, and believed that some of these things could not really be true. But then Frederick Franz gave a talk in 1985, about two years after the book CoC came out, and confirmed many of the same controversial issues out of his own mouth.

Wouldn’t that be the point for Raymond? Self-serving especially having to rely on people like Carl to make a comparison. Was this an ExJW’s dream come true? I would imagine there were more members at Bethel that would disagree with the interest of Raymond’s book, possed.

I have several Bethel members at my hall that didn’t find the appeal on how Raymond coined the phrase the truth. Therefore, I don’t see any benefit for true Christians, maybe someone that poison the well like butler but that’s just hurting him.

But just like anything, being critical of the Bible student era has always been an argument for those that apostasy. What other misbegotten did Raymond inherit by following others rather than trust in God what he accomplished for the Watchtower just to throw it away because of pride?

Everything that goes inside at Bethel is not always made public no matter how hard anyone thinks the GB is an open book. So, no, if someone would have been critical of Raymond, it wouldn’t be ritually exposed.

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

So it appears that you don't have any evidence to give for your claim that the book was "challenged" by Fred Franz or others who knew him.

Can we also say you don’t have proof Fred Franz didn’t? Try not to overreach and backtrack on your earlier sentiment about knowing the GB when it’s obvious that’s an exaggeration.

I’m not mentally challenged spiritually to accept apostate literature that you seem to want to promote. Sorry.

“A final reason, resulting from the previous two, is that of conscience. What do you do when you see mounting evidence that people are being hurt, deeply hurt, with no real justification? What obligation does any of us have—before God and toward fellow humans—when he sees that information is withheld from people to whom it could be of the most serious consequence? These were questions with which I struggled. What follows expands on these reasons.”

How convenient to all of a sudden develop a conscience to justify his own actions as a member of the 18 Governing Body. Not only is this untrue but disingenuous as to his motive.

Perhaps you fall for sob stories, but it takes time to know a person. This person angered over being overlooked for president is a classic case of narcissism.

If you’re a person that is looking for excuses to fade or leave, promote this book if you must, just keep the Watchtower and faithful followers of Christ out. Perhaps JW only would be more suitable to discuss this among yourselves since no one will be able to refute misguided understanding.

1 hour ago, Witness said:

Can you give me scriptural verification that the GB is God's coordinated earthly rule?

The Watchtower has corrupted the decrees of God – His Word. God’s “laws” are the source of life which Jesus brought us as, “The Word”. John 1:1 His teachings incorporate every decree God expects us to follow. The WT leaders “judge” and “measure” according to the decrees of men.

So far scripture stipulates those that can take the lead. You seem to fail in wanting to acknowledge their needs to be a party responsible in any given organization as instructed by Jesus. A faithful servant, reputable men, shepherd of a flock. All these are found in scripture you seem to dismiss. The ancients had prophets as guides. Christianity was guided by Christ and instructed to do the same throughout the world. With responsible people in the lead. Why defy Jesus instructions and God’s laws. 2 Timothy 4:3-4

What part of Christ words in Acts 20:28-30 fails you. These are the inspired words of God through John 1:1

Then it is yourself that are altering Jesus teachings. Then you should consider placing yourself in the same category as the GB. It’s dishonest to claim scripture as a convenience. 1 John 4:1-6

Therefore, can you give me verification the Watchtower GB is NOT God’s coordinated helpers on earth as God's will is in heaven?

On the rest, it appears the interpretation you give on scripture is misguided. Can anyone listen to a corrupter of God's word? Once again, wouldn’t that put you in the same category as these “Pharisaical leaders” you hate? Matthew 16:11-12

It appears the same problem Raymond Franz had after confusing scripture with his own personal desire.

All that the GB is about is written in scripture. In effect, the Watchtower constitution. What, is your constitution and doctrine when having people understand scripture the incorrect way for personal gain. Therefore, no one is adding to Christ instructions aside from those that hate a fellow Christian Colossians 2:4

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

It was / is the wicked angels, that is the devil and his demons,  that challenge God's sovereignty not me. I just stated the case

Your wrong, you are doing the same thing. Therefore, don't lie to yourself, no one else is listening.

2 hours ago, Witness said:

We have full evidence that the disciples were inspired by Spirit. John 20:22;  Rom 8:5,9; 1 Cor 2:10  We don't have that evidence with the GB who must alter teachings continually.   We don't hear how the Spirit directs them, but that they are not "inspired"; so, instead, we hear how the GB put their heads together to come up with new decrees.  There is no comparison to the apostles.  Why make it?  

Are you suggesting, Jesus didn’t alter the Jewish teaching? At what point does denigrating the GB by you and Butler amount to ethical thinking. A person that opposes God’s coordinated earthly rule and one that renounces their own faith have zero credibility to any conversation.

So far, I see conflict as Raymond Franz had about CHANGE. Although the change he had in mind was becoming the next President of the Watchtower, and when that didn’t happen, apostasy grew within.

As a living sacrifice, shouldn’t we make a change? Romans 12:1-2

Shouldn’t we be renewed day by day? 2 Corinthians 4:16-18

Whereas those that oppose authority defy God.

Romans 13:2

2Consequently, the one who resists authority is opposing what God has set in place, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

There seems to be some confusion about the great commission. Matthew 28:19-20 and the rule we each have with our personal abilities. Mark 16:15 what it means to preach thought-out the world. Acts 1:8 and who has what capabilities and responsibilities. 

 

Ephesians 4:11-16 King James Version (KJV)

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

 

Those that refuse to obey the instructions left by Christ cannot be called a Christian. Jesus appointed the apostles but God gave them the Holy Spirit just as it was given to Christ. Jesus appointed the laborers for the harvest Luke 10, but God gave them the Holy Spirit.

Did Jesus defy the prevailing authority? Matthew 23:2-4

Therefore, let’s put that authority nonsense to rest once and for all. What is a flock without a shepherd? Acts 20:28 who are the overseers, the sheep? I can think of several things not to listen to such lofty arguments. 2 Corinthians 10:5

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But back to your question that starts out with the words, "So if Raymond was a proven liar." I'm not sure what you are referring to. I've never heard anyone claim that R.Franz was a proven liar. If anyone ever said that, I'd be very interested in what they were referring to. It might be very useful to point to something inaccurate* in his book. I'm sure the average Witness who never knew him could easily get the idea he was "liar," but I have never heard anyone who knew him at Bethel ever say that anything in his book was inaccurate. Quite the opposite in fact.

[I found a couple inaccuracies, by the way, such as when in CoC, he mentioned that the Pope and bishops can speak as if they are "infallible" in the minds of Catholics. He should not have said "and bishops" unless he was referring only to previous "bishops of Rome," which are the popes.]

Apparently, you must not have known the Franz’s as well as you claim including other governing body members. However, having read Raymond books, I can unequivocally state I reject the claims about the organization. Therefore, your argument is incorrect. Here is a man that found confusion with cynicism. Who put him up to it?

One area which is true would be how the POPE saw itself. In the beginning, they saw themselves as equal to Christ, thus being incapable of doing wrong. This, of course, is ludicrous since no one made the pope perfect. It doesn’t take Raymond’s books to bring to light something that should be already known to Christians. Therefore, a poor example.

Then you challenge God’s sovereignty and superiority. I would have to ask, who are you to challenge God? Are you Satan as the inference implies? Hitler was an evil man as a youth. That darkened heart continued to increase over the embarrassment of having his country lose a war and having Jews gain some control over the motherland. Therefore, the Hitler analogy is inadequate in how someone would blame an organization or society. Seems like an overreach bordering on mental instability.

 

This proves the reach Satan has and the bad influence that affects the world. It would be like telling God it was his fault Adam and Eve became imperfect after being created perfect (sinless). So I don’t see where blaming an organization, a group, or society makes any sense. Where would free be, if implied after a single person’s decision was made that had a costly effect in our lives?

This would mean, an argument like this would be impossible to achieve if humanity thought the same. Can we then infer that generation X is to blame for our troubles today? Can we say, we share equal responsibility for every murder, assault, rape, etc. that is committed every second throughout the world? Why should those that abide by Gods and man’s laws need to accept the blame?

With that consent of thought, it would be the responsibility of each parent toward their OWN children. Understand what a child is into, whom they speak with, who they hang around with, at home and at church. So if we are to blame an organization for something, then make it equal across the board to blame everyone including members of that organization regardless if they themselves are critical of such organization enough to think their instructions don’t go far enough to please a few within the masses. Those critics would also bear the blame if we are to think without forethought.

On 12/7/2017 at 5:47 AM, JW Insider said:

That comes from R.Franz in CoC. But nothing in CoC has ever been rebutted, and I have spoken to one member of the Governing Body who said that just because everything he said in the book was true, it's still poison, because the intent is to expose weakness, while love covers a multitude of sins

So if Raymond was a proven liar, and his accounts were challenged within the organization members along with Fred Franz himself, we are to believe that the CoC book was never challenged because you say so? We are to trust your words and your words only?

How demonstrative to think a heretic writes an op-ed and people believe it comes from the Watchtower. The letter itself continues to make the same claim heard over and over again on the internet.

That means the same senseless propaganda continues to circulate to entice the masses, instead of looking at the worldwide problem as it should be, with diligence, not cynicism.

Watchtower faders must be loving this. The most important thing would be, how the government operates, and how their own laws make it a conflicting proposition for those that want genuine justice.

There lies the difference between keeping records and not keeping records. The reality is not one size fits all, but each case is unique and should be handled with caution not with guilty until proven either way guilty or innocent.

A good case of destroying evidence is with a US case in Texas where a priest “murdered” a woman, and the church along with the STATE OF TEXAS concealed the matter. It wasn’t until a reporter found some documents that brought this 57-year-old case back to life. A murder case, with child sexual abuse outcome.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/church-officials-shielded-priest-suspected-of-murder-for-decades/

https://www.abqjournal.com/1255522/new-legal-troubles-for-the-archdiocese-of-santa-fe.html

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/ag-requests-full-disclosure-from-new-mexico-dioceses-on-sex/article_84dac37d-bfd4-5df3-aa9e-cda737509837.html

“Assistant District Attorney Mike Garza -- no relation to the victim Irene Garza -- said during trial that a deal was struck following the murder between local law enforcement at the time and officials with the Catholic Church to protect John Feit from prosecution and allow the Church hierarchy to discipline the priest under its own terms.”

Therefore, the only slander I see here is with exJW’s, faders and noneJW’s

1 minute ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do tell me though how my criticism of the GB and it's JW org concerning Child Abuse has failed ?  I think it is the GB that have failed to protect the congregation Earthwide. 

Different topic. Stick to this one, or do a new post for it.

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

In my opinion the scriptures were written only for the Anointed to FULLY understand. Yes of course we of the earthly class can understand much of it, but not all and not fully. 

As for your argument about perfection. Consider the other definition that is associated with Christianity, not common usage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_perfection

https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/perfect-perfection/

Therefore, the word accordingly is an abstract that can be used as relative.

58 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

I won't be pathetic enough (unlike some) to start calling you names or retaliate to your last comment.

It seems something offended you. I have seen many of your other posts. I wouldn't retaliate either or be pathetic about it.